President Obama didn't wait long after Tuesday's devastating elections to give critics another reason to question his leadership, but this time the subject matter was more grim than a pair of governorships.

After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective.

But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms.

LINK

Obama Gives Shout Out to 'Congressional Medal of Honor Winner' Who Isn't







Zell/Granny 2012

Send Your Thanks To the U.S.Military

Post a Message to our Soldiers

Of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most
Grandpa Bob
Professional Fence Hanger / Spectator
Former Crew Chief
Grandma's Rocking Chair

Now the cowardly 0boy and his socialist/marxist cronies are going to use the rest of the tarp money to REDUCE the deficit??????????????
I think rather than pay my Master Card bill next month I'll just put it on my Discover card and pocket the money!!!!!!!!!!!

Now the cowardly 0boy is curtsying to the jap emperor!
What won't this empty suit do to demean and embaress the United States of America?

I hope he he never gets that 3:00 am phone call.


President Obama takes heat on Afghan timing

Jennifer Loven of The Associated Press had asked: “Can you explain to people watching and criticizing your deliberations what piece of information you're still lacking to make that call.”

“With respect to Afghanistan, Jennifer,” the president scolded, “I don't think this is a matter of some datum of information that I'm waiting on. … Critics of the process … tend not to be folks who … are directly involved in what's happening in Afghanistan. Those who are, recognize the gravity of the situation and recognize the importance of us getting this right.”


President Obama makes no effort to conceal irritation when the first question he's asked in Asia is about what's taking him so long on Afghanistan.

LINK







Zell/Granny 2012

Send Your Thanks To the U.S.Military

Post a Message to our Soldiers

Of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most
Grandpa Bob
Professional Fence Hanger / Spectator
Former Crew Chief
Grandma's Rocking Chair

He's a petulent narcissist! He reacts this way all the time and the media gives him a total pass.

The urgency to spend money we don't have on programs that will further bankrupt this country is at the utmost. But making a decision that has been in the making for several months and whose delay is deteriorating the moral of our troop is something that needs to be overanalyzed to the n-th degree!?!?

It will not matter what decision is made.
The far right will find fault in either direction.

We have borrowed more than enough money from China to fight 2 wars.
Thanks to dumbya.

Pull the troops out and keep the money @ home.

Its pretty bad to have to protect the farmers who grow poppies..........

3AM phone call







Zell/Granny 2012

Send Your Thanks To the U.S.Military

Post a Message to our Soldiers

Of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most
Grandpa Bob
Professional Fence Hanger / Spectator
Former Crew Chief
Grandma's Rocking Chair

The murdering jihadist terrorists are coming to NYC for trial!
Now we have the ethics bereft Attorney General claiming he decided to do this with his wife and brother?
Along comes the Governor of New York who says he was told six (6) months ago by the cowardly 0boy administration the trials were going to be in NYC? Who is lying this time? Undoubtedly the habitual liars!
Another question, is the Governor of New York, he's "all black", going to be labeled a racist for opposing the cowardly 0boy's half white side???????????????????

Zell/Granny 2012

Send Your Thanks To the U.S.Military

Post a Message to our Soldiers

Of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most
Grandpa Bob
Professional Fence Hanger / Spectator
Former Crew Chief
Grandma's Rocking Chair

The cowardly 0boy must have insisted no pictures when he genuflected and kissed the commie chinese Dictator's pinky ring?
More bumbling and one more lie from the cowardly 0boy, Gitmo will not close in January!
The NYC trial for the jihadist terrorists is going to expose our legal system to worldwide hypocrisy and unfairness charges. The Ethics bereft Attorney General says the murderers are going to get AMERICAN justice, going to be convicted and executed BUT even if not convicted they would not be released? Now the cowardly 0boy has chimed in with, "they will be convicted and executed!"
Question? Is their real aim to destroy our legal system?
When the jihadists attorney wants charges dropped because no Miranda rights, required for each and every defendant, were read what will the judges response be?
Next, the defendants were tortured to get confessions, charges should be dropped?

Cowardly 43 didn't do anything to bring the terrorists to justice plus didn't want to go after Osama.

Not a peep from the cowardly rats was heard.

Confused once again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That was the rapist and his deputy Attorney General, now the cowardly 0boy's Attorney General, that didn't even seek indictments against the bombers of the Khobar Towers and the USS Cole!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The simple question is this...

Do you believe enemy combatants are to be afforded Constitutional rights?

It's a simple question to answer... unless you have some agenda, political or otherwise!! No one with an ounce of intellectual honesty can answer YES to the question.

How can they logically try someone in a civilian court that, 1. was not read his Miranda rights, 2. the president has contended he was "tortured", 3. civilian charges weren't filed in a timely manner, 4. both the president and attorney general have said, "he will be convicted and executed"!
Any judge following United States of America statutes would be forced to throw the case out immediately!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dem Conyers: "I'm Getting Tired Of Saving Obama's Can"







Zell/Granny 2012

Send Your Thanks To the U.S.Military

Post a Message to our Soldiers

Of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most
Grandpa Bob
Professional Fence Hanger / Spectator
Former Crew Chief
Grandma's Rocking Chair

Looks like it's going to be the Secretary of the Treasury, turbo tax cheat timmy, that gets thrown under the bus for the cowardly 0boy and cohorts bungling on the economy!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Who will be the next sacrificial lamb???????????

quote:

Who will be the next sacrificial lamb???????????

Looks like Hillary might be getting setup for that trip under the bus.

"Secretary of State Clinton has built an unlikely rapport with the Afghan leader, according to administration officials.
It is a new and risky role for Mrs. Clinton — one that thrusts her into the thick of the administration’s most critical international problem, but that also hitches her reputation to a leader who has often proved unreliable. If Mr. Karzai lets down the White House again, Mrs. Clinton, as his principal intermediary with the administration, could find herself damaged along with him."

LINK







Zell/Granny 2012

Send Your Thanks To the U.S.Military

Post a Message to our Soldiers

Of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most
Grandpa Bob
Professional Fence Hanger / Spectator
Former Crew Chief
Grandma's Rocking Chair

Zell/Granny 2012

Send Your Thanks To the U.S.Military

Post a Message to our Soldiers

Of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most
Grandpa Bob
Professional Fence Hanger / Spectator
Former Crew Chief
Grandma's Rocking Chair

quote:

Originally posted by stanman:
The simple question is this...

Do you believe enemy combatants are to be afforded Constitutional rights?

It's a simple question to answer... unless you have some agenda, political or otherwise!! No one with an ounce of intellectual honesty can answer YES to the question.

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

I did notice none of the libs or lib wannabes answered.

quote:

Originally posted by muggs:

quote:

Originally posted by stanman:
The simple question is this...

Do you believe enemy combatants are to be afforded Constitutional rights?

It's a simple question to answer... unless you have some agenda, political or otherwise!! No one with an ounce of intellectual honesty can answer YES to the question.

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

I did notice none of the libs or lib wannabes answered.

Right from a Republican site.......

According to the Supreme Court who has more brains when it comes to the Constitution than a few chest pounders think they have...........


Republicans disavow the Constitution in favor of fear-mongering
By Aaron - May 20, 2009 at 6:07 PM

According to an article from The Associated Press, “Guantanamo [is] a political win GOP needed.” The story is referencing the vote in the Senate that occurred earlier today. In a vote of 90 to 6, the Senate overwhelmingly opposed President Obama’s effort to close the prison that harbors accused terrorists at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

Every Republican member of the Senate passed on the opportunity to recognize that terrorist combatants do have Constitutional rights and that protections of the Bill of Rights apply to all persons under the jurisdiction of the U.S. regardless of where in the world that jurisdiction prevails.

As you know, one of Barack Obama’s first acts as president was to order the closing of the controversial prison for terrorist suspects within a year. Obama had campaigned on the issue, but Republicans pounced on what they correctly asserted to be a critical flaw: the lack of detailed plans for where the roughly 240 detainees would go if the Cuban prison were shut down.

On that point, the town of Hardin, Montana (pop. 3,400) has volunteered to house 40% of the detainees (about 100 of them) in a state prison facility that is vacant.


Greg Smith, Economic Development Director in Hardin, says that there are 464 beds in the facility and over 120 jobs could be created by moving those prisoners to Hardin. With flat land, a state-of-the-art corrections facility, and a Mayor (and City Council) willing to house the suspects, all it would have taken was a simple Senate vote in favor of closing Gitmo.

That vote, however, would require Senators to have a backbone and LEAD the country — something foreign to them. Only six Senators, all from the far left wing of the Democrat Party, had the courage to vote in favor of the funding to move the captives to U.S. soil.

Why should we house these accused terrorists in the U.S.? The fact is that housing them in Gitmo has denied the terrorist suspects their constitutional rights and there is simply no possibility that piecemeal changes in law could create a legal system at Guantanamo equal to the U.S. criminal justice or courts martial systems.

Additionally, the detentions of the terrorist suspects are only temporary expedients that apply only in the field of combat according to U.S. law. Since we’re not at war with Cuba, the legitimate idea of temporarily detaining combatants in a war zone does not apply.


According to the Center for Constitutional Rights, the abuses at Guantanamo Bay carried out at the beckon call of high-level government officials include widespread abuse:

• solitary confinement of detainees for periods exceeding a year;
• sleep deprivation of detainees for days, weeks, or months;
• exposure of detainees to prolonged temperature extremes;
• beatings of detainees;
• threats of transfer to a foreign country for torture;
• torture in foreign countries or at U.S. military bases abroad before transfer to Guantánamo;
• sexual harassment and rape or threat of rape against detainees;
• deprivation of medical treatment for serious conditions, or treatment granted only for “cooperating”; and
• “short-shackling,” where wrists and ankles are bound together and to the floor for hours or day.

I realize these suspects are accused of being terrorists and several of them were involved in the 911 attacks. I have tremendous sympathy for victims (and their families) of these accused terrorists and am quite convinced that the detainees at Gitmo are quite literally the scum of the earth.

That said, those accused of crimes in a nation governed by the rule of law are entitled to equal treatment under the law and due process rights under the Fifth Amendment as well as protection from cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.

In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Boumediene v. Bush that the Guantanamo captives are entitled to the protection of the United States Constitution.

The Fifth Amendment includes “… nor shall [any person] be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …”. Further, the Eighth Amendment guarantees freedom from “cruel and unusual punishment” by government.


In Furman v. Georgia (1972), Justice Brennan wrote that “[t]here are … four principles by which we may determine whether a particular punishment is ‘cruel and unusual’.” They include:


- The “essential predicate” is “that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity,” especially torture.
- “A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion.”
- “A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society.”
- “A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary.”


The torture procedures that the Bush Administration, the Republicans in Congress, and the spineless Democrats who purport to be civil libertarians have gone along with violate constitutional protections and are clearly ‘cruel and unusual’ tactics under the definition of the U.S. Supreme Court. The types of torture that have been used against suspected terrorists also violate the Geneva Conventions and the UN Convention Against Torture (both signed by the U.S.).

Moreover, the techniques are not effective. According to the U.S. Army Interrogation Field Manuel 34-52 (1992), “Use of torture and other illegal methods is a poor technique that yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear.”

And according to the Center for Constitutional Rights,

“If someone has information, they are just as likely, if not more so, to disclose the information after non-abusive interrogation tactics. Second, many who are interrogated do not have information to give. Third, whether or not a person has information, he or she will likely confess to anything to stop torture; thus the information obtained is never reliable.”


Quoth the AP article: “Republicans have searched mightily for a good political issue this year as their traditional three Gs — gays, guns and God — have lost some steam. Now a fourth G — Guantanamo Bay — is handing them big boost.”

The issue of Guantanamo may be giving Republicans a boost in popular support, but it is at the sacrifice of the U.S. Constitution and a respect for the rule of law.

Over the last eight years, the Bush Administration has systematically dismantled some of the most important rights and protections of the United States Constitution.